• Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Europe logoCarnegie lettermark logo
EUUkraine
  • Donate
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

Article

Nuclear Levees

Officials have groped for references to atomic bombs to describe the destruction that Hurricane Katrina brought to the southeast United States. Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour said, “I can only imagine that this is what Hiroshima looked like 60 years ago.”  But Hiroshima was much worse.  The bombing killed 140,000 people either immediately or within the year and destroyed or damaged 70,000 of the 76,000 buildings in the city.  Experts have warned for years of the real danger of a Hiroshima-size terrorist attack on an American city but, like the known risk to New Orleans, the government response has been woefully inadequate.  Now is the time to shore up the nuclear security dams and levees that can prevent this ultimate disaster.   (Read More)

Link Copied
By Joseph Cirincione
Published on Sep 6, 2005

Officials have groped for references to atomic bombs to describe the destruction that Hurricane Katrina brought to the southeast United States. Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour said, “I can only imagine that this is what Hiroshima looked like 60 years ago.”  But Hiroshima was much worse.  The bombing killed 140,000 people either immediately or within the year and destroyed or damaged 70,000 of the 76,000 buildings in the city.  Experts have warned for years of the real danger of a Hiroshima-size terrorist attack on an American city but, like the known risk to New Orleans, the government response has been woefully inadequate.  Now is the time to shore up the nuclear security dams and levees that can prevent this ultimate disaster.  

Storm Warnings

Dozens of experts and reports have issued blunt warnings of the danger. The most prominent of these perhaps is the 9/11 Commission Report recommendations that the country had to make a “maximum effort” to prevent a nuclear 9/11.  Commission Chair Thomas Kean said, “A nuclear weapon in the hands of a terrorist is the single greatest threat that faces our country today.” Commission Vice Chair Lee Hamilton said “You have to elevate this problem above all other problems of national security, because it represents the greatest threat to the American people.” 

The report’s recommendations have been largely ignored.  Former Senator Sam Nunn says, “American citizens have every reason to ask, ‘Are we doing all we can to prevent a nuclear attack?’  The answer is ‘no, we are not.’” 

An Action Agenda

The number one goal should be to ensure that terrorists remain non-nuclear. As President George W. Bush has said, “The nations of the world must do all we can to secure and eliminate nuclear…materials.”

“Doing all we can” should mean moving out forcefully to:

·       Secure What Exists Now.  State-of-the-art security must be applied to all nuclear weapons and weapon-usable materials, whether civilian or military, everywhere. Where effective security is impossible, materials should be relocated or eliminated.

·       End Production of Weapon-Usable Materials.  The production of highly enriched uranium should be permanently ended and the separation of weapon-usable plutonium should be suspended until current stocks are drawn down.  No new countries should build or operate enrichment or reprocessing facilities.

·       End Use.  Civilian research, power and naval reactors that run on weapon-usable fuels should be converted to alternative fuels or shut down.

·       Eliminate Surplus Materials.  Large stockpiles of weapon-usable materials in countries around the world should be securely eliminated. 

These recommendations are elaborated in the 2005 study from the Carnegie Endowment, Universal Compliance:  A Strategy for Nuclear Security.  The Carnegie report provides a road map for how to prevent nuclear terrorism and reduce the risks from other global nuclear dangers. 

There is no need for any American official to someday be in the position that the heads of FEMA and the Homeland Security Department now find themselves:  the day after the disaster trying to explain why they did not do all they could have done.  A comprehensive effort to prevent nuclear terrorism is both practical and affordable; we only lack the political will to do it. 


Related Links:

"Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security," Carnegie Report by George Perkovich, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, Joseph Cirincione, Rose Gottemoeller, Jon Wolfsthal, March 2005

"The 9/11 Commission Report," Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, 22 July 2004

"The Day After an Attack, What Would We Wish We Had Done? Why Aren't We Doing It Now?"
Testimony by Sam Nunn, Co-Chairman, Nuclear Threat Initiative, Before the 9/11 Public Discourse Project, 27 June 2005

About the Author

Joseph Cirincione

Former Senior Associate, Director for NonProliferation

    Recent Work

  • Report
    Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security<br>With 2007 Report Card on Progress
      • +2

      George Perkovich, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, Joseph Cirincione, …

  • Article
    The End of Neoconservatism

      Joseph Cirincione

Joseph Cirincione
Former Senior Associate, Director for NonProliferation
Joseph Cirincione
North AmericaUnited States

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Europe

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europe on Iran: Gone with the Wind

    Europe’s reaction to the war in Iran has been disunited and meek, a far cry from its previously leading role in diplomacy with Tehran. To avoid being condemned to the sidelines while escalation continues, Brussels needs to stand up for international law.

      Pierre Vimont

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Can the EU Attract Foreign Investment and Reduce Dependencies?

    EU member states clash over how to boost the union’s competitiveness: Some want to favor European industries in public procurement, while others worry this could deter foreign investment. So, can the EU simultaneously attract global capital and reduce dependencies?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • Article
    What Can the EU Do About Trump 2.0?

    Europe’s policy of subservience to the Trump administration has failed. For Washington to take the EU seriously, its leaders now need to combine engagement with robust pushback.

      Stefan Lehne

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europe Falls Behind in the South Caucasus Connectivity Race

    The EU lacks leadership and strategic planning in the South Caucasus, while the United States is leading the charge. To secure its geopolitical interests, Brussels must invest in new connectivity for the region.

      Zaur Shiriyev

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Is It Time for Europe to Reengage With Belarus?

    In return for a trade deal and the release of political prisoners, the United States has lifted sanctions on Belarus, breaking the previous Western policy consensus. Should Europeans follow suit, using their leverage to extract concessions from Lukashenko, or continue to isolate a key Kremlin ally?

      Thomas de Waal, ed.

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
Carnegie Europe logo, white
Rue du Congrès, 151000 Brussels, Belgium
  • Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Gender Equality Plan
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.